[armitron]

> the place Stallman screwed up was in trying to quibble over terms in defense of a man who we have reason to believe had sex with an woman of an age in a jurisdiction where that might have constituted rape.

This is where you jump to conclusions and become a part of this charade. All we have are unsubstantiated allegations that do not even say definitively that sex took place. And just based on that, your and the mob's conclusion is "we have reason to believe" ?

I agree with Stallman and everyone else who is extremely skeptical and advises caution. Alas, the mob is out for blood.

[rosser]

You know what, dude? I really, really hope it is just an allegation. I want desperately for it not to be the case that Minsky got sucked into Epstein's shitty web. But the deposition we've seen so far is just that: the only one we've seen so far.

That said, and this is key, none of this is about whether or not Minsky did anything. Assuming he did, it isn't even about whether it was with a minor, or a woman of legal age. It's about Stallman having decided that was a prudent moment and subject about which to "Well actually..." at the world. The whole point is Stallman's behavior, not Minsky's.

In all seriousness: what the actual fuck does Richard Stallman's opinion on what does or doesn't constitute rape matter? Why would he think that was a point that needed his quibbling? Maybe that's the judgement under question.

[mtrower]

> In all seriousness: what the actual fuck does Richard Stallman's opinion on what does or doesn't constitute rape matter? Why would he think that was a point that needed his quibbling? Maybe that's the judgement under question.

I mean he didn't just jump in with it out of nowhere. Discussion had already been started, and someone brought up both her age and the location, and declared it as therefore rape (__rape__, with emphasis). This communication was directed at RMS himself, as a rebuttal (bordering on dismissal) to his stance; RMS responded to it, each point in turn.

[reirob]

Maybe because he didn't self-censor himself?

P.S.: Sorry, but I couldn't help being sarcastic...

[mantap]

Because he has autism.

[rosser]

So do I. I learned a long damned time ago how counterproductive it usually was to butt into conversations to, "Well, actually..." at people.

[mantap]

Stallman is probably a little bit further along the spectrum than you then.

This is a man who commiserated someone for having a baby because it would distract them from emacs development. He has been playing social minesweeper for decades and finally lost.